Tennis is one of the most popular and fastest growing sports. One of the most common laments of its millions of devotees is that the balls do not last long enough. For professional tennis players the balls last for barely one set. For novices they may last as long as ten sets. But in any case, their life is so short that many a player has complained about the quality of tennis balls.
This invention does not purport to make a better ball, but rather provides means for prolonging the useful life of tennis balls. This invention provides efficient means for reinflating balls. This process can be repeated many times, and the active life of a tennis ball can be increased many times.
Devices to inflate balls and other objects are by no means new; they have been known for many years. Our invention, however, provides for a device to inflate balls in a quick, simple and fool-proof manner, thus minimizing the possibility of over-inflation or other damage.
Fineberg (U.S. Pat. No. 3,889,807) discloses a means for pressurizing tennis balls. A compression collar of a smaller diameter than the ball is used to compress the ball about its girth. Then two mold sections are fitted around the entire ball and all the pieces are squeezed tightly into one mold. This method does not involve injecting gas into the ball by means of a needle but, rather, the gas in the ball is subjected to great pressure.
Martino (U.S. Pat. No. 3,368,302), Copstead (U.S. Pat. No. 3,611,623). Elson (U.S. Pat. No. 3,768,501) and Collins (U.S. Pat. No. 3,796,181) diclose methods whereby balloons, or other inflatable objects, are attached to the valve or nozzle of a gas storage tank. By depressing a button, or other like means, an appropriate mechanism is activated and gas is forced into the balloon. These prior art devices, however, are not suitable for pressurizing a tennis ball, as a tennis ball, unlike a balloon, does not have an open end to which a valve or nozzle may be attached.
Brink (U.S. Pat. No. 3,921,977) discloses a device including a hypodermic needle to inject gas into a tennis ball. However, Brink's apparatus and process is long and complicated and does not lend itself to portability and court side use, whereas our device may be used at court side, with a minimum of complexity. Furthermore, Brink's needle is exposed and vulnerable to breaking, as opposed to ours which is safely protected in a sheath-like structure. Brink provides no means to protect the needle nor to accurately and safely align and puncture the ball with the needle. Brink relies solely on the dexterity of the hands of the user. A cursory examination of the drawings of the Brink patent will clearly show it is in no manner similar to our invention.